I.M.NAGARAJAIAH Vs. DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KSRTC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 23rd March 2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.57222/2013 whereby, the writ petition filed by the appellant herein challenging the judgment and award passed by the Principal Labour Court, Bangalore, in I.D.No.63/2012 dated 31st October 2013 was dismissed.

(2.) The appellant was working as a conductor in the respondent-KSRTC at Bangalore. The appellant remained absent for a continuous period of 796 days from 16th May 2004 to 21st July 2006. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him by the respondent-Corporation leading to his dismissal from service. However, he was subsequently reinstated by the respondent-Corporation taking a lenient view based on sympathy and on humanitarian grounds. However, subsequently, the appellant once again remained unauthorisedly absent from 7th July 2011 onwards. Despite call notices being issued to him calling upon him to report to duty, the appellant did not comply with the demand made therein. Accordingly, articles of charges dated 10th October 2011 were issued against him and after due enquiry, the enquiry officer submitted a report to the effect that the charges leveled against the appellant were duly proved. Thereafter, vide order dated 04th June 2012, the Divisional Controller and the Disciplinary Authority of the respondent-Corporation considered the said report as well as the entire material on record and came to the conclusion that the enquiry was fair and proper, that the appellant had not made out any compelling circumstances to remain unauthorisedly absent and that he had committed a similar misconduct on an earlier occasion when the respondent had taken a lenient view and in the absence of any material to establish the reasons as to why the appellant remained unauthorisedly absent from 7th July 2011 onwards, the report of the enquiry officer deserves to be accepted and the appellant was guilty of misconduct. Further, having regard to the fact that the appellant was guilty of repeated misconduct which would adversely affect the working and functioning of the respondent- Corporation, he concluded that it was essential that the appellant was dismissed from service and accordingly, the aforesaid order dated 4th June 2012 was passed dismissing the appellant from service.

(3.) Aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 4th June 2012 passed by the Divisional Controller and the Disciplinary Authority, the appellant approached the Labour court in I.D.No.63/2012 under Section 10(4) (A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The respondent-Corporation contested the said matter.